- 9 -
where its application would be contrary to any treaty obligation
of the United States in effect on the date of enactment of the
1954 Code. See S. Rept. 100-445 at 316-328 (1988), hereinafter
referred to as 1988 Senate Report). More recently, Congress had
specifically provided from time to time that it intended certain
amendments of the Internal Revenue Code to prevail over treaties
in case of a conflict. Id. In TAMRA, Congress amended section
7852(d) to provide that neither a provision of a treaty nor a law
of the United States affecting revenue shall have preferential
status by reason of its being a treaty or a law. TAMRA sec.
1012(aa)(1), 102 Stat. 3531.
Congress intended this change to place treaties and revenue
statutes on the same footing, so that conflicts in their
provisions would be resolved under the rule that the provision
adopted later-in-time controls. 1988 Senate Report, supra at
321-322. Congress also intended this change to codify the
approach of the courts under which the same canons of
construction applied to the interaction of two statutes enacted
at different times would be applied to the interaction of revenue
statutes and treaties enacted and entered into at differenct
times. Id. at 321.
In addition to amending section 7852(d), Congress enacted
the following provision as section 1012(aa)(2) of TAMRA:
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011